MrBubbles96

joined 1 year ago
[–] MrBubbles96@lemmy.ml 1 points 10 months ago

It keeps getting mentioned because it's the new Bethesda game (also its kind of a big deal being their first new IP in, what, 20 years?), it hasn't been even a year since it dropped (so it's still fresh to people), and it has more content coming. And because every new update will stir the old users again and bring a new wave of users that will also keep mentioning its improvements and its flaws.

And i mean, even aside from that, Oblivion and Morrowind still get mentioned to this day (in both good ways and bad), and they're much older. Same's going to happen to Starfield. It's just the way it is.

[–] MrBubbles96@lemmy.ml 10 points 10 months ago

Thank you for your contribution. Mod Authors in general are GOATed for what they do, but the ones that do tiny things like these are some unsung heroes, IMO.

[–] MrBubbles96@lemmy.ml 7 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Yup. That second bit should be a golden standard, but...honestly? Knowing companies hire psychiatrists and all that jazz that tell them exactly what they need to put out there to get people to buy, install FOMO, hit addicts where it hurts, or just wear them down till they eventually say "yes", and that its not just for games, it becomes kinda murky for me to just throw all the blame at the people buying. Not saying that people shouldn't do their do dilagence (and after a while, to learn to ignore said marketing tricks. Fool me once and all that), they absolutely should, just that the other side are also hitting bellow the belt every chance they can in order to make a sale.

[–] MrBubbles96@lemmy.ml 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Fair, but here's the thing:

  1. It's a big release with a life cycle. Big release by the guys who made Skyrim? it's going to continue to get new people even after it's life cycle officially ends. So as long as Bethesda keeps digging themselves deeper instead of out the hole they made, the negative reviews and press will keep coming; by these new folks and the current players who see Bethesda basically making the situation worse in order to give any curious buyers a warning to be mindful at what they're going to throw money at. Do some people sometimes go a bit too scathing in their takes? Sure. But honestly? I'm not gonna blame em. I know a disillusioned person when i see one, and disillusioned or otherwise, they're still not at all wrong with most of their complaints.

  2. the "hater" thing...yeah, most of these aren't haters. If they were bringing up BS claims, sure (See: The Pronouns thing). But the majority of "hate" this game is getting is....actual shortcomings the game has, or for the pretty crappy responses the devs put out in response. Dare I say it, most of the "hate" is by actual fans of Bethesda. Again, very disillusioned likely now former fans, but yeah. Haters don't spend the energy to go this indepth about something, fans passionate about the thing typically do tho.

Like i said in my other comment, the camel's back broke for a lot of people after 13 long years. Not 5 or 3 years, 13. Even more if you were a Bethesda fan before Skyrim.

[–] MrBubbles96@lemmy.ml 4 points 10 months ago

On one hand, I kinda understand why people in general, not just game devs, try and implement the "bigger is better" idea. It's easy, and all you really need to do is, theoretically, be "bigger" than the competition.

Problem here is that the closest competition to Starfeild is No Man's Sky, despite not being in the same genre (I've seen the same thing being asked in so many reviews: "What does Starfield do that NMS doesn't?" Like, even plotwise. I didn't even know NMS had a plot TBH). And Bethesda decided to (intentionally or otherwise) ape NMS, not realizing that procedural generation worked in NMS because for one, it's a survivalcraft at heart while Starfeild isn't, and because the five main compents of that game are...well, solidly made, and tie INTO the galaxy being procedurally generated (especially the survival and building aspect) instead of it being tacked on for the "wow factor". Nowadays, i mean. On release tho...gonna assume you could have easily made that argument.

Meanwhile, Starfield's galaxy is procedurally generated because....the player apparently needs a buffet of locations to explore to kill/rack up time rather than a handful of them with actually handcrafted touches and purpose divided into star systems (so they can get the space Odyssey vibe the game is trying to go with) or something, kinda like the way Mass Effect 2's map was.

[–] MrBubbles96@lemmy.ml 19 points 10 months ago

the reviews of Elex are mostly positive

Yes, and Piranha Bytes is small AA German game studio with a staggering 33 people as of 2021 (according to wikipedia) that have always stuck to their lane and made very niche games in the background that are basically only appealling to their audience. They know damn well who they're aiming at with their stuff too, because they're not trying to change the formula much as of Elex 2 or grab as much people as possible.

You can compare that to Bethesda (that according to inside sources, wants to act like a AA when they're acctually AAA in manpower, budget, and project scope), with it's 450 people on staff and different subsidaries that work together with them as needed, to Piranha Bytes, but that'd be disingenuous as all hell.

[–] MrBubbles96@lemmy.ml 37 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (13 children)

No. It's got nothing to do with "Haters being Haters". The camel's back just finally broke.

Frankly, it's something that I'm surprised didn't happen sooner. People got tired of excusing Bethesda's many blunders since they joined Microsoft (because after that, they should have no excuse for mediocre...anything, especially on the technical side) Bethesda also got too used to people giving them a pass and going "oh, silly Bethesda!" when they saw a severe bug or just bad/mediocre mechanics, where if it was anyone else, they'd be rightfully upset that they paid fully AAA price and the game was a broken, bug filled mess (sometimes with bugs that date back to Morrowind, at that), and is finally feeling that burn others normally get. It was cute (apparently) in 2006 with Oblivion, it's no longer cute in 2023.

It's also likely to do with Bethesda's attitude. Them responding to criticism about some planets being empty and boring to explore with things like "it's not boring. When Armstrong and the gang landed on the moon IRL, they weren't bored" or just passive aggresively in general to negative reviews with actual critisms of the game instead of taking the critisim to heart and striving to maybe add some content to them as an update (or DLC, but them charging $70, then asking for more money to fix a problem in the base game would bring em more heat than anything) being some examples.

Or the fact that, instead of fixing severe bugs or optimizing their game, they're introducing this Creations thing and basically doing what i said in parenthesis above.

[–] MrBubbles96@lemmy.ml 28 points 10 months ago (3 children)

procedurally generated ain't all bad, but for this game it was not the move. As soon as I heard about "100+ planets" i kinda lost hope in the game. What they should've done instead was make A Solar System. 8 or so planets to land in, explore, and do quests in, and go absolutely ham on those 8 planets to make them as intesting and diverse from each other as possible. The rest would be moons or space stations you'd find exploring space. IDK, this could just be me, but i feel doing this alone would have improved the game significantly

[–] MrBubbles96@lemmy.ml 124 points 10 months ago

Huh, so this is what happens when you passive-aggressively diss your customers' reviews and tell them "no, it isn't our fault our game feels dated and like a step down from what we had before, you guys are just playing the game wrong"...

[–] MrBubbles96@lemmy.ml 16 points 10 months ago

It looks like he's having fun there lol

[–] MrBubbles96@lemmy.ml 1 points 11 months ago

Fair enough. Just like Cyberpunk tho, they'll never be able to give people the game they were hyping NMS to be. Unlike Cyberpunk, IMO anyways, it does get closer to it tho (and i give it brownie points because 1) they used the money they made and put it back into the game to fix their mistakes and gave these "expansions" to players for free, and 2) they never tried to downplay anything like CDPR did. They knew they messed up, admitted to it, and fixed it. None of this "oh, the game launched better than people make it out to be. It was just a cool thing to hate Cyberpunk" thing)

[–] MrBubbles96@lemmy.ml 15 points 11 months ago (2 children)

While I am impressed that No Man's Sky pulled a 180 in the end and I doubt they'll repeat the same mistakes with this, a dose of some skeptism is always healthy.

Also, doesn't hurt to check what the thing looks like at release--we just had The Day Before pull the ol' switcharoo on people, after all--and how it plays when it's out before making a purchase (looking right at Cyberpunk the game vs Cyberpunk the game that was pitched to people, here...no amount of "it's better now" is gonna bring the game that was hyped up before release/used "Work in Progress" as a shield to life. Not without a complete rework. Could also apply to the above The Day Before too). By all means, believe that the devs learned, I really hope they did, cuz as a Fantasy junkie, this looks like something I'd really enjoy...but also be at least a little cautious in what you're gonna throw money at

view more: ‹ prev next ›